Site Management > Site Support / Feedback
Discord issue
The E:
--- Quote from: Andreas Rybak on February 03, 2021, 01:59:29 pm ---I know who the individuals in question are. I understand they share certain similar political views and view certain jokes made in bad taste. Yes, I made politically insensitive comments well over a year and a half ago in order to deliberately rile up certain extremely sensitive users in a political channel that I left over a year ago. Said individuals(some of whom are online right now) have attempted to over the last year ensure I never do anything in the community again in a campaign of targeted harassment. The fact that these claims have been made to you only now when the community is riled up should be a clear sign there is insincerity and an agenda at work.
--- End quote ---
Oh, so you were only jokingly making statements that are holocaust denial.
Great. That clears that right up.
You are staying banned. I do not give a **** whether someone makes statements like that in jest or in all seriousness. There are lines that should never, ever be crossed, and that is one of them.
Also, let me make something abundantly clear. I have been aware of these accusations for a long time. I haven't taken any action on them, or recommended that action be taken, because off-site behaviour is a tricky issue.
The discord moderation staff has recently made the decision that, in egregious cases like these, we will ban for offsite behaviour. Thus, you were banned.
Fusion:
--- Quote from: The E on February 03, 2021, 02:49:00 pm ---Also, let me make something abundantly clear. I have been aware of these accusations for a long time. I haven't taken any action on them, or recommended that action be taken, because off-site behaviour is a tricky issue.
The discord moderation staff has recently made the decision that, in egregious cases like these, we will ban for offsite behaviour. Thus, you were banned.
--- End quote ---
I admit to making insensitive comments over a year ago on a discord full of toxicity I left. I have not at any point on HLP’s discord or forum actively engaged in anything capable of being in any way construed as any sort of Holocaust denial, and in fact in the post you quoted have actively expounded my true and sincere beliefs regarding an act of genocidal moral depravity - while simultaneously condemning my prior insensitive comments. I have even condemned them on the very very rare occasion that said comments have ever been brought up, clarified they do not represent my views, and have stated similarly to the above my belief that the Holocaust happened and was a targeted attack on the Jews by the Nazi regime in Germany.
It is inappropriate, especially a year to a year and a half after said event has happened, to ban someone for, again, insensitive jokes made not even on the Discord itself, based on policy made through a moderation change not publicly announced, implemented with no warning, and with no indication for nearly 36 hours to the banned person why they were banned.
Additionally, the creation of a dichotomic system where the rules of punishment in this community are different depending on what service you’re using and who the head admin is is ridiculous and only further encourages the splintering of the community. Again, with a community that’s been through 5 presidents over a long enough span of time for its members to be born and potentially graduate from college, this needs to stop and we need to look more at coming together instead of devaluing words and actively seeking to purge the community of elements certain people view as unwanted. That sort of behavior inevitably leads to an unironically fascistic system where ever less deviant views from those of the staff result in people getting purged from the community - and with many friends in the community who have a diverse array of views, I don’t want to see that happen personally.
EDIT: was additionally pointed out to me that this system of banning people for past sins doesn’t allow for growth of individual users past prior maladjusted behavior and more to overarching normalcy, but instead punishes them for past misdeeds instead of considering how they are functioning now. By this logic, even one single misdeed should be eternally held against someone regardless as to whether they have apologized for it, rejected it, and anathematized their past jokes - which would damn many people.
MP-Ryan:
CORRECTION - This post content references a different user recently banned due to Holocaust denial.
-
I've seen the screenshots. While the forum and the discord are managed slightly differently (due to the nature of the medium), the principles are the same, and if you had made similar comments on the forums in any capacity you would count yourself lucky not to have been banned on the spot.
Holocaust denial and minimization is unacceptable. This is not a matter of difference of opinion, and I don't particularly care if you think this was nuanced or you think you have grown, nor do I particularly care whether you viewed it as a joke. You made public comments that minimize one of the worst genocides in history, and the worst in modern memory, and you have now experienced consequences of that in a medium in which real-time moderation is difficult. The fact that you have not been banned on the forums speaks more to that fact that many of us were originally unaware of these comments and that we can closely watch your posting behaviour here, which is far less transient. I would urge you to take this as a lesson in social consequences of your actions and learn from it instead of rules lawyering, because if you prefer not to have fragmented participation in this community we can absolutely accommodate a ban from the forums as well if that's preferred.
xenocartographer:
So, I have my own perspectives and biases on this issue. I'm operating with limited information. I believe my reasoning holds up based on the information available to me, but I like to believe I'm a rational person. I recognize that I'm speculating, so if there's any information that contradicts any of these points, please bring it up and I'll change my position.
That being said, based on what I do know, there's a lot about this that doesn't smell right to me. I'm going to dig into it and hope either party can provide some answers. First off, there's this exchange:
--- Quote ---You were banned due to credible accusations of being a holocaust denier. We do not tolerate that.
--- End quote ---
--- Quote ---If it will unabashedly dispel these false claims about me, will go ahead and publicly state it here for the record - Yes, I believe the Holocaust happened. I believe Hitler actively engaged in a campaign of genocide against ethnic and religious Jews in Germany - Jews who just twenty years ago he had fought beside in the trenches of World War I - and allowed horrendous and egregious crimes against humanity to happen to them in an act of barbarism unparalleled. I pray that such an indication of the inherently evil nature of man never happens again, and actively disavow any suggestions that I support, praise, or otherwise hold a positive view of the Holocaust in any way, shape, or form.
--- End quote ---
--- Quote ---Oh, so you were only jokingly making statements that are holocaust denial. Great. That clears that right up.
--- End quote ---
There's an issue here that has nothing to do with the ban, and Andreas was right to object to it. The E's first post all but calls Andreas a Holocaust denier, which is basically equivalent to calling him a card-carrying Neo-Nazi. It's a profoundly serious condemnation and should be treated as such. By Andreas' own admission, he made "insensitive jokes" for immature reasons. That isn't in dispute. But it is not equivalent to denying the Holocaust, as E implied. And even if Andreas had held that position at the time, he doesn't now. Either way, unless the situation is profoundly different than it seems, calling Andreas a "Holocaust denier" was inappropriate.
Secondly, there's E's claim to have blocked Andreas because they couldn't reply. On the surface, this doesn't really add up. Unless Andreas were spamming E, that isn't a particularly sensible reason to block him in the first place. But "friending" is mutual on Discord, and unless they were "friends" in the first place, Andreas shouldn't have been able to message E in the first place. Since both parties agree that Andreas messaged E after the ban, they must have been friends, so E should have been able to respond to Andreas. (Discord also allows DMs between people who have a server in common, whether or not they're friends, but if that were the case, E should still have been able to reply to Andreas.)
None of that's directly related to the ban. What is definitely related is how strangely this ban was handled. As far as I'm aware, no one was notified of the ban. I performed server-wide searches on Discord for "ban," "banned", "kick", "remove", "suspend", and even "hammer" and found no relevant results. Andreas was not notified of the ban - neither why he was banned nor even that he had been. But, most tellingly, he DM'd one of the other Discord moderators to ask if he had been, and that moderator didn't know.
Let that sink in a bit. A ban is the single strongest tool in a moderator's toolbox. They're compared to Mjolnir for a reason. For this other moderator to be unaware that the ban had happened implies that E invoked a moderator's strongest tool without seeking the consent of, nor even notifying, the other moderators. If E had even posted "I just banned Andreas" in some moderator-only server, then this other mod would have been aware. They would certainly have been aware if there were any discussion about it. That implies that The E performed the ban unilaterally and swept it under the rug.
Why?
Andreas has repeatedly stated that the comments he was banned for were made a year ago. So far, E hasn't denied that. That brings us to the heart of this case. If Andreas' behavior wasn't ban-worthy a year ago, and hasn't been ban-worthy in the mean time, where did this come from? So far, both parties have been content to leave unchallenged the narrative that Andreas' behavior has been fine since then. If that's the case, why ban him now?
What motivated a immediate, unilateral ban a year after the fact?
E, like I said above, I know I only have one side of the story. So far, I've tried to make it clear why the information that's available to me doesn't add up, but I know that's not all the information. If Andreas did or said something problematic recently, for example, that totally changes the picture. So, please, if you know anything like that, please share it.
MP-Ryan:
CORRECTION - This post content references a different user recently banned due to Holocaust denial.
-
MageKing posted that the user MorGy was banned immediately after he did so and why. If Andreas would like us to post the screenshots that led to this action, we can certainly accommodate that request, but I will caution that that places those screenshots fully in public domain and the Streisand Effect is a very real thing that he may not want to experience. We will leave that up to him, however.
I can't speak to why DahBlount was unaware - it is possible he missed the staff discussion, which is not his fault as those chats tend to move quickly.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version